Mahilamani vs The Director General Of Police
2024 Latest Caselaw 32903 Ker

Kerala High Court

Mahilamani vs The Director General Of Police on 13 November, 2024

                                                   2024:KER:85273

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 22ND KARTHIKA, 1946

                      WP(C) NO. 26465 OF 2020

PETITIONER:

          MAHILAMANI
          AGED 55 YEARS
          W/O.MADHUSOODHANAN PILLAI, VISHNU SADANAM,
          THANNIMUKKU, VELIYAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 540.

          BY ADVS.
          M.KIRANLAL
          SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN
          SRI.T.S.SARATH
          SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
          SHRI.SAMEER M NAIR




RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
          POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

    2     SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
          KOLLAM RURAL DISTRICT, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 574.

    3     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
          POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 537.

    4     ASHWANI,
          D/O.SUNNY DANIEL, KOTTEPPARA, MAALAYIL, VELIYAM
          P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 540.

          SRI.RAJEEV GEORGE,GOVERNMENT PLEADER
 WP(C)No.26465 of 2020
                                                2024:KER:85273
                              2
      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C)No.26465 of 2020
                                                       2024:KER:85273
                                   3


                        JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 13th day of November, 2024)

The writ petition is preferred alleging harassment by the 4 th

respondent against the second son of the petitioner. In that regard,

it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that

unnecessarily the son was summoned by the 3rd respondent, though

it was explained properly that he is not involved in the alleged

offence referred in the complaint preferred by the 4th respondent.

Today when the matter is taken up for consideration, the

learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that nothing survives in

this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as

nothing survives in the prayer sought in the writ petition.

Sd/-

P.M MANOJ JUDGE AKH

2024:KER:85273

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26465/2020

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 19.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS DATED 19.11.2020 & ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT.